From Chairman John Hall of the Subcommittee
on Disability at the House Veterans Affairs
Committee, held today at the Committees
main website: www.house.gov

___________________________________________



Opening Statement of Hon. John J. Hall, Chairman, Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs




Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen:

Would you please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance?

This morning we are here to conduct an oversight hearing entitled, “Examining Appellate Processes and their Impact on Veterans”. I thank the witnesses for coming and I look forward to working with you on some of proposals that may require legislative changes. Making the administrative and judicial appeals processes better and more efficient for our veterans is our shared priority and I thank you for joining me in helping to find workable solutions.

The process a veteran goes through when filing an appeal is a never ending story that this Subcommittee has heard many times before. A new claim is more like a short story. Upon submission, it can be developed and rated in about six months. However, if a veteran disagrees with the VA decision and files an appeal, then it becomes an epic tale that can go on for years or even decades.

First, the veteran can appeal the Regional Office decision to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, known as the BVA. This process can take up to two years. From there, the veteran can appeal the BVA decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, where the average time from filing to disposition is 446 days. From there, an appeal can be made to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit Court usually takes up to a year to make a decision, which then can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. This cycle can repeat itself a few times depending upon the options a veteran chooses and can take between 5-10 years before there is any type of finality. I think, like me, many of you find this statistic astounding and evidence of an area that is in need of closer scrutiny by this Congress.

How can we improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the appellate story to the benefit of our veterans, their families and survivors is the question at hand and the reason why I convened this hearing today. Right now, I think we all can agree that the multitude of appellate processes that involve constant re-development and re-remands is at odds with providing our veterans the timely and meaningful appellate justice they deserve.

First, I firmly believe that we must overcome the quality and accuracy challenges at VA’s 57 Regional Offices, which perpetuate the unspoken belief held by many veterans and their advocates that given the variances in RO decisions, an appeal to the BVA is a necessity. Clearly, better standardized training and a hard look at the work credit reward system as outlined in my bill from the 110th Congress, the Veterans Disability Benefits Claims Modernization Act, H.R. 5892, which was incorporated into P.L. 110-389, should help on this front.

However, I am also concerned that the BVA still employs a system of rewards based on the quantity of work rather than its quality. Despite the additional staff, centralization of appeals, and all of the training conducted since this Subcommittee heard from both the AMC and BVA in 2007, the backlog has increased by several thousand cases, days to process an appeal have only improved slightly, and remands have turned into re-remands. Thus, the appellate story is one that goes on and on with often no end in sight. Surely, this is not what anyone thinks of as justice for America’s veterans?

With a backlog of over 43,000 cases in FY08, the average length of time for an appeal with the BVA is an amazing 563 days. This inefficiency is only exceeded by the outcome of these long waits – a 22 percent denial rate. Also, although BVA claims a 95 percent accuracy rate, the Court of Appeals for Veterans’ Claims remands at least 70 percent of cases appealed, indicating a much lower quality rate in reality. It is clear from reading the BVA’s annual report to Congress that these percentages are inconsistent and may not be based on the same quality measures that Congress considers indicative of good performance.

I think too that we can fairly conclude that in its current state, the AMC is a failed experiment whose poor performance and lack of accountability confounds veterans, their advocates and Members of Congress alike. It is time we take a long hard look at this layer of bureaucracy, which adds nearly two years to the appellate process.

I am eager to hear from the witnesses on this area of concern. Additionally, I look forward to hearing from Judge Kasold on the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims’ annual report, the 70 percent remand rate, and on Judge Greene’s short and long-term plans for the Court as a critical piece in producing better appellate outcomes.

Today’s witnesses will speak to the concerns this Subcommittee has had with the BVA’s and AMC’s focus on production over quality, the poor development of claims, the lack of a technological infrastructure to manage information, and the lack of accountability throughout the entire adjudication and appeals process. I know too that we will hear about concerns we have with looking for ways that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims can serve as more of a final arbiter for veterans’ appeals.

Moving forward, I hope that we can come up with a consensus on a plan that will foster a way forward for veterans and perhaps mitigate the current cumbersome and lengthy appellate process. If this happens, then this is one story that could end a lot better.

I now recognize Ranking Member Lamborn for his opening statement.


______________________________________________
END of Chairman Hall's Hearing Opening Statement
on VA Claims Appeals System